delete_document

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds one genuinely useful piece of context beyond that: the document's embeddings are deleted as well, a cascade effect the annotations do not express. It stops short of stating irreversibility, permission requirements, or behavior when the id does not exist.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and with zero filler. The second sentence earns its place by adding the embedding cascade, though "Removes the document" slightly restates the first sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple single-parameter mutation with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is barely adequate. It omits irreversibility, error behavior for unknown ids, and side effects on anything referencing the document, which matter for a destructive operation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% with a single required integer, so baseline is 3. The description adds nothing beyond the schema and does not clarify that the id is the document id returned by list_documents or get_document, leaving the identifier's origin implicit.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a document") plus a scope detail, so the agent knows exactly what is removed. The resource is unique among siblings (delete_flow, delete_post, delete_tag target other entities), so no explicit sibling differentiation is needed, though none is offered.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites or permissions, and no statement about alternatives (e.g., update_document or archiving instead). The agent must infer context entirely from the tool name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.